From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B2BC22301 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 07:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744788579; cv=none; b=PbF/PbRL7dPqQFSELhLD5pSM3ANiawaS8dYkXdKMJN5+S9ZVvasET3vaRnws6TOYsObZC2gar5coohtf6Pf7hGHzDSX+KL6QyrmUqkbOdWcoTPc6K/2344RVjxH+jTb22QKMKBQ9NknU3WGXMvGOFBmaeHcWTtOg0Rzz2iTKwxI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744788579; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TIChxUATx5DhX08LSREkhu77Qc8TJDta739s18CEga8=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date:MIME-Version; b=oyUb9HM1nmUAfBYJ9rsRN7ihQM5w6HAayNZOWDsDuQKthAogm6ZNX2d5sBFo8PDyzZ5c2ryk09FUE8nHiW6DlvWRybl3oDpBZ1E725sT4Hdyxo60bxs77wmUN4fKsbLAN0b5d9uyTAf1pWZu/JP5RmHpbEiwSwk58mZzVMDZ678= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ZHG0tN+X; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ZHG0tN+X" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A5689C4CEE2; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 07:29:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1744788578; bh=TIChxUATx5DhX08LSREkhu77Qc8TJDta739s18CEga8=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ZHG0tN+XZtS9nHa3/fweVR4oEejeltUPgRsZdFUxs9UAXgtMwBjae9X/gEUK4V5Em pQTfqkpIUc0ooVu9Ol/cCzyyaESMAld0K3y3RujF3OIxHk+aKPUs2aYadGXT7rhUgN 74NhEQCChtuDb4bNcrOiAX4l/t+IT6MBHIOJMLhhd3X0pEsf56CYU3mRktRNXaXQ5V O3/XTiZDVA58ytql53zMlYZ5ChupwcD45HWvt7tjp7g7H/AdeL6e9RP36UiQ6n8yNm 1mW2tD6SDkhhxqgkppZDN1FhAdxPVzWmdwy97xubR2rMU5IOzcswG5Ow1j79hfhiVX GAnSldIgo0oxQ== Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v6 0/5] BPF path manager, part 6 From: Geliang Tang To: Matthieu Baerts Cc: MPTCP Linux In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:29:26 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.3-0ubuntu1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Matt, On Tue, 2025-04-15 at 11:16 +0800, Geliang Tang wrote: > Hi Matt, > > On Tue, 2025-04-08 at 20:13 +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote: > > Hi Geliang, > > > > On 28/03/2025 05:01, Geliang Tang wrote: > > > From: Geliang Tang > > > > > > v6: > > >  - squash accept_new_subflow patches into one. > > >  - change "pm->subflows == subflows_max - 1" to > > > pm->subflows + 1 == subflows_max. > > >  - not to call accept_new_subflow under the PM lock. > > >  - add mptcp_pm_accept_subflow helpers. > > >  - drop READ_ONCE in mptcp_pm_worker. > > >  - clear all the pm status flags once in mptcp_pm_worker. > > > > Thank you for the new version. > > > > FYI, I'm still thinking about how to handle PM lock should be > > handled. I > > will come back to you later. I might suggest a new version with > > some > > modifications if that's OK, that might be easier. > > Thanks for helping me think about this part around the PM lock. Look > forward to your feedback. If you have time to take over this part around the PM lock, that would be even better and I would be very grateful. Thanks, -Geliang > > -Geliang > > > > > Cheers, > > Matt > >